<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1994 (1) TMI 249 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157435</link>
    <description>Where a dealer has notified a changed business address after closure of premises, substituted service for assessment proceedings must be attempted at the communicated address after normal modes of service fail and reasons are recorded for affixation. Service only at the closed address, without effective substituted service at the updated address, leaves the dealer without proper notice and vitiates an ex parte best judgment assessment. The article notes that the assessment and connected appellate and tribunal orders were interfered with and the matter was remitted for fresh decision after giving the dealer an opportunity to produce the relevant forms.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Oct 2013 15:33:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174459" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (1) TMI 249 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157435</link>
      <description>Where a dealer has notified a changed business address after closure of premises, substituted service for assessment proceedings must be attempted at the communicated address after normal modes of service fail and reasons are recorded for affixation. Service only at the closed address, without effective substituted service at the updated address, leaves the dealer without proper notice and vitiates an ex parte best judgment assessment. The article notes that the assessment and connected appellate and tribunal orders were interfered with and the matter was remitted for fresh decision after giving the dealer an opportunity to produce the relevant forms.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157435</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>